evshrug2

Lives in United States Pittsburgh/ / North East/United States, PA, United States
Works as a Student/Graphic Design/Freelance Photography
Has a website at web.mac.com/stilgar7
Joined on Mar 2, 2007

Comments

Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

evshrug2: The breadth of µ4/3rd's system, born from having two companies developing first-party products (and a few accessories manufacturers making µ4/3rd's mount stuff), is one of the greatest strengths over the other mirrorless systems. I can't tell what this will result in... it might've been cheaper for Panasonic to just buy Oly's photography assets, and probably the investment would not have been enough money to buy out the medical imaging department.

Why would panasonic expand into that industry anyway? Their market is consumer electronics. They might as well go into the ATM Banking market as much as they would go into medical imaging.

Most likely they invested because of their common link, they want to keep Oly alive because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Could this be some sort of sentimental move to keep µ4/3rds interesting?

I suppose you have a point, I guess mine is just that it's not within Panasonic's core competencies, and that sometimes quality suffers when a company loses focus. It's possible that Panasonic could just have a med-imaging company-within-a-company and do alright.

As far as your TV division comment, I get the feeling from the super discounting that goes on that it's not an entirely profitable industry in general... tho a necessary one. I would be particularly sad to see Panasonic leave that market, I love my Plasma I bought last year, I really feel I got near-peak visual quality at a price I could afford.

Link | Posted on Jun 11, 2012 at 22:22 UTC
In reply to:

evshrug2: The breadth of µ4/3rd's system, born from having two companies developing first-party products (and a few accessories manufacturers making µ4/3rd's mount stuff), is one of the greatest strengths over the other mirrorless systems. I can't tell what this will result in... it might've been cheaper for Panasonic to just buy Oly's photography assets, and probably the investment would not have been enough money to buy out the medical imaging department.

Why would panasonic expand into that industry anyway? Their market is consumer electronics. They might as well go into the ATM Banking market as much as they would go into medical imaging.

Most likely they invested because of their common link, they want to keep Oly alive because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Could this be some sort of sentimental move to keep µ4/3rds interesting?

Or would that have been enough to buy out the medical division too? I don't know, I was just comparing the investment size to the amount of Oly's covered-up losses, and the business sense of buying into a new market when Panasonic is trying to make one of their existing markets continue to work.

Egads, if Oly just boarded up, wouldn't the reprecussions on equipment supply in the medical imaging sector and sudden $1.7bn economic hole in the japanese economy – that nobody would take responsibility for repaying from profits – be really damaging in the near future?

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 23:09 UTC
In reply to:

LJohnK2: Olympus is a great example of technical ingenuity being engineering into irrelevancy by incompetent upper management and corruption up to the Board....I'm surprised Panasonic wants to touch them.

I suppose if it was me (and I'm a nobody) and I had a significant stake in the development of µ4/3rds, I would invest money into reigning in that incompetent upper management to save that technical ingenuity.

Panasonic's choice not to just "go it alone" though is interesting. Maybe the publicity of a µ4/3rds manufacturer going under would kill the entire "consortium." I bet Panasonic is really upset with Oly and just trying to make profit on their existing high-end camera investment.

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 22:56 UTC

The breadth of µ4/3rd's system, born from having two companies developing first-party products (and a few accessories manufacturers making µ4/3rd's mount stuff), is one of the greatest strengths over the other mirrorless systems. I can't tell what this will result in... it might've been cheaper for Panasonic to just buy Oly's photography assets, and probably the investment would not have been enough money to buy out the medical imaging department.

Why would panasonic expand into that industry anyway? Their market is consumer electronics. They might as well go into the ATM Banking market as much as they would go into medical imaging.

Most likely they invested because of their common link, they want to keep Oly alive because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Could this be some sort of sentimental move to keep µ4/3rds interesting?

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 22:45 UTC as 8th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

Cy Cheze: Panasonic is not a "rival camera maker" from Olympus' vantage? Will it maintain manufacture of the Olympus cameras just for the sake of "fair play," so that Lumix market share or margins not grow too much? Is Panasonic faced with a surfeit of profits these days?

The profitable medical imaging business is not of strategic interest?

More likely, Panasonic is interested in the medical imaging sector as a growth opportunity, and will "manage" the Olympus camera business to reduce competition by holding back production or elimination of redundancies and overlap. Some consumer P&S will models simply phase out. The GH3 body will be more expensive than the OMD EM5, but all m4/3 lenses and accessories will remain premium priced and relatively scarce.

I think the "rival camera maker" was from Panasonic's perspective, i.e. if one of Panasonic's camera maker rivals (who are not part of µ4/3) bought into Oly and killed off half of the µ4/3rd's development.
The breadth of µ4/3rd's system, born from having two companies developing first-party products (and a few accessories manufacturers making µ4/3rd's mount stuff), is one of the greatest strengths over the other mirrorless systems. I can't tell what this will result in... it might've been cheaper for Panasonic to just buy Oly's photography assets, and probably the investment wouldn't have been enough money to buy out the medical imaging department.
Why would panasonic expand into that industry anyway? Their market is consumer electronics. They might as well go into the ATM Banking market as much as they would go into medical imaging.
Most likely they invested because of their common link, they want to keep Oly alive because "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2012 at 22:38 UTC

So, that weatherproofing... Without knowing how robust this lens is weather sealed, does the forum think Panasonic is trying to sell an accessory for the Olympus OM-D (profit margins are higher on lenses than bodies), or is there a weather sealed Lumix in the works?

Link | Posted on May 22, 2012 at 21:36 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article User Guide: Getting the most out of the Olympus E-M5 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

spacemanspiff72: First post for me and I have to ask the silliest of questions. I just got the camera and cannot select multiple images in order to delete a batch of photos. It says in the manual that you can do this, but how?

I must be one of the very few "less intelligent" owners...

Hey, glad you found the answer! Posting on the forum may have been more appropriate, but you would've gotten help. As far as manuals, sometimes when writers start from scratch they forget some basic things that seem old pat. Still... better descriptions and writing is a golden thing for companies to improve on.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2012 at 08:21 UTC
On article User Guide: Getting the most out of the Olympus E-M5 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

audijam: where is Canon F1D or AE1D? seriously!

Sure gets the snooze from me... I'm almost excited for the over-segmented P&S cameras to die off.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2012 at 08:17 UTC
On article User Guide: Getting the most out of the Olympus E-M5 (271 comments in total)
In reply to:

filmlaw: I am really torn and solicit everyone's opinion. I can't decide between a Sony NEX 7 and E-M5. Kit lens with both to start. I want a camera that delivers great images after enlargement and post-processing and is easy to travel with thus the reason the DSLR must stay home. I have now ordered both but will only purchase one. I like the idea of the size of the APS-C sensor over the 4/3. I have downloaded and thoroughly read both manuals and every review and I am still looking for the definitive reason to select one over the other. Conversely, the E-M5 image stabilization in the body seems superior to optical stabilization. Thank you for any help.

µ4/3 can mount any lens with the right adapter. So that includes all the Leicas, as well as many other legacy lenses such as pancake primes from Pentax and Konica, and even tiny CCTV lenses. Adapters for µ4/3 are all over eBay, and guides are here in the micro 4/3 forum and across the web. I have an f1.8 40mm Konica Hexanon I've been using for great paid portraits over the years on my 4/3rds E-620, and just adapted it to fit on my new Pen E-PL1.

Link | Posted on May 9, 2012 at 08:13 UTC
On article Just posted: Our Samsung NX200 in-depth review (175 comments in total)
In reply to:

lupin_le_vorace: Cool! I am glad to see that you are still doing reviews! ;))

@Barney
Hey, it's appreciation regardless.
I check 6 days a week or more, and I'd say that I'm still glad you're still doing reviews like nobody else. I mean, there are opinion (like Steve Huff) and feature reviews (looking at you CNET!), but then there is DPR's work that break it down in great detail AND analyzes the benefits. It's my most trusted resource.

Link | Posted on Feb 29, 2012 at 02:52 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (215 comments in total)
In reply to:

wroclaw: what we see is, it is going to be difficult to get an up to date image image quality with this small sensor. being a seasoned olympus fanboy, i am disappointed with the IQ. the images lack sharpness/resolving power. maybe it was poor photographer skills, camera shake, etc.

but then again, what is the point in showing such technically bad images to the public which is obsessed with IQ, like dpreview.

overall, i am afraid this cam aims for young ladies with small handbags as a buyer.

@ wroclaw,
Your opinion may start a flame war, but I doubt it will change the minds of others because of the subjective bashing of the photographer and reviewer and the lack of non-subjective comparisons and reasoning about image quality. All that said, though, I hope you find some things in your hobbies and interests that satisfy you.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 16:00 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Olympus OM-D E-M5 (215 comments in total)
In reply to:

klopus: Along with ASP-C Pentax K10D I own still great despite its relative age Pana GF1 with a set of fine glass including truly amazing 20 f1.7. This new Oly E-M5 seems like probably current best in m43 world, almost ideal. But I'm not excited.

My beef is with m43 format itself, namely limited (compared to ASP-C not speaking of FF) DOF control. For my style in many situations I find myself longing for more shallow depth especially with m43 zooms that aren't fast. In terms of DOF f4.5 on m43 is more like f6.3 on ASP-C. Also I can't exactly pin it but GF1 output, even RAW, has this slight P&S-ish look to it. And I attribute it not so much to Pana sensor/processing but to smaller sensor since this look is present on many image sampels I saw from other m43 cameras.

So for myself, no matter how much I admire small size/weight of bodies and lens, I see an end of the road with m43. I'll either will continue solely with ASP-C upgrading to K-5 or maybe will complement it with Fuji X-Pro1.

As per the "point and shoot look," I only have images that feel that way when using extreme ISO settings (meaning limited dynamic range/tonal gradations) or extreme in-camera sharpening. This is true of any camera really... but the µ4/3 and 4/3 sensors have more headroom than a cheap P&S before getting "digital" and flakey, and in normal conditions is capable of high-subtlety results.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2012 at 15:33 UTC
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

choochoo22: OK Canon, now it’s your turn. What I expect Canon to bring to the table, as always, is excellent build quality and refinement of other people’s ideas. Fortunately other people have taken the risk, introduced many new ideas, and created a new market for compact system cameras. Here is my wish list for Canon (or Fuji, if they’re up to it):

The form factor, hump-less viewfinder, hot-shoe, and sensor of the NEX-7, it would be OK to drop a few megapix to achieve better noise or the ultrafast hybrid focusing and burst rate of the V1. It should have a smoothly integrated user interface and excellent jpeg engine. It should have Sony’s sophisticated processing modes (HDR, Sweep pan, DRO, etc.), 1080p/60 video with still capture. Olympus’ in-body image stabilization and good looks would be nice. At least one pocket able zoom lens and a range of appropriate quality lenses at affordable prices and, of course, adapters for Canon and other’s existing SLR lenses.

Did I miss anything?

All those features sound quite nice, however Canon's track record is against IBIS. My main gripe against Canon is that the ergonomics and plastics quality of all their Rebel DSLRs so far have been enough to have me choose other brands.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2011 at 14:08 UTC
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

robbo d: Pentax Q........"hopelessly outclassed"....Isn't that just a bit harsh ?? Have a bit more of think about what you say and how you say it......

The DXO mark, puts it closer to the others than most imagined and real life users rate it very highly, when you think its a point and shoot size sensor, I would think its damn good........depends which way you WANT to look at it.

Yes it has the smallest sensor and there is nothing like it. I don't think I actually want DPreview to bother with a review as I am getting fed up with narrow minded people trashing it. However, they have at least started by saying its in a niche of its own, so for people who want something more portable than a NEX, its a serious photographic tool.

Its new thinking and for people so seemingly informed on new technology, its surprises me that people can't understand the concept. Technology is getting smaller and better. Its a start and hell of a good effort. But Hopelessly outclassed, get a life.........

Robbo,
I love bold ideas, and I love having lens choice, yet I can't shake the feeling that the Pentax Q, as it is now, offers anything over a compact camera like an Olympus XZY or Canon S. As someone who genuinely wants a compact camera with a high level of control over the look of images (and open to new ideas), can you please share the strengths of the Pentax Q over an enthusiast compact?

P.S. I notice that I haven't bothered/been interested in using a focal range over 100mm equiv. in the past 3 years or so.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2011 at 14:02 UTC
On article Mirrorless Roundup 2011 (426 comments in total)
In reply to:

topstuff: I think the review here completely misses the point about the Pentax Q.

On the one hand, the review says that the sensor is "hopelessly outclassed" while on the other hand the review concedes that the Q is the only camera in the class that is pocketable...

So, is'nt the pocketable nature of the Q the whole point? And given that the pocketability of the camera is a function of its small sensor, complaining about the sensor rather misses the point.

Surely, it is more appropriate to consider how the small sensor provides IQ in the real world, with the ability to provide prints of 10x8 in perfectly acceptable quality, in a uniquely small size?

If the Pentax Q had a larger sensor, it would be a completely different camera and not the tiny thing it is now.

Topstuff,
While I would love Pentax to have a winner on their hands, this product is not "it." You pointed out the pocket-ability factor, and the small sensor, but you missed the CRUCIAL third point made in the article: there are more pocketable cameras, with the same sized sensor, that are offered for prices that make this Pentax an outlier.

Interchangable lenses are sacrificed when one chooses, say, a canon S100 or Olympus XZY, BUT the most common focal range (and then some) are covered, and the "super tele" range outside of the compact camera's built-in lens range is ineffective on a Pentax Q type body ANYWAY.

Given all the choices in the market today, I can't see a single compelling feature to choose a Q, other than eccentric desire to be different or pentax love. I'll tell you what though: Take the k-5's features and apply them to a mirrorless system (please save IBIS and ergonomics!), I would buy it, even though I'm not shopping.

Link | Posted on Dec 24, 2011 at 13:42 UTC
In reply to:

bcalkins: With a wide open aperture of f/6.3 I hope it is sharp wide open :)

Mitsuoka,
Compare MFT graphs of Oly lenses vs anything else on the market; you'll see they stand up as very sharp and very very competitive.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2011 at 03:42 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Poltorak: I have a stupid question and need enlighten - which body is Dust and Splashproof this weather sealed lens is going to be used on?

Alex,
I sincerely hope this is indication of a new body from Oly. Clearly this lens (& probably a new body) have been in development since before the Olympus board scandal, & I would love to see the continued health of Oly Imaging R&D. I'm actually impressed because this lens has a nice focal range & specialization in macro AND video. I feel this, combined with the nice tidy primes, makes for an excellent system.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2011 at 03:40 UTC
In reply to:

Alex Poltorak: I have a stupid question and need enlighten - which body is Dust and Splashproof this weather sealed lens is going to be used on?

Francis,
If you need 30fps, then you need a shutterspeed at least 1/30 of a second and it needs to be a multiple of that speed - so most often 1/60 will be the shutterspeed. Not sure about you, but most photography I do can easily work with that shutterspeed. Only time that would be a challenge is in available light documentary, and in that respect the image quality STILL beats the common camcorder. Pro video shooters ought to control light, extra lighting equipment is pretty much "assumed" for a "pro" cinemagraphic setup. In any case, your knowledge clearly illustrates that you are not a pro video shooter, so all your complaints are moot opinions anyway.

Link | Posted on Dec 16, 2011 at 03:19 UTC
In reply to:

Ashley Pomeroy: It'd be fascinating to know what the plan was going to be if none of this had come out; if they'd never hired Woodford, and if they'd managed to keep their rottenness under wraps. Were they hoping that they could continue to lose money hand over fist indefinitely, and the banks would play along? Perhaps they would. Or were the people in charge hoping that it would all fall apart on the next team's watch?

Very good question... they probably didn't have a rational long-run plan.
But it was highly possible that they were going to blame things on Woodward... erm, woodford? Please forgive me for the lapse, but in general I bet he reacted to what he recognized as a scapegoat situation.

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2011 at 06:02 UTC
In reply to:

CameraLabTester: Now showing:"All The Photographers Men" The Olympusgate Drama

lol or "The Sharpest Men in the Room" like the Enron movie? maybe it should be the "Sharpest Lens, Dirtiest Men..."

Link | Posted on Dec 10, 2011 at 05:53 UTC
Total: 35, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »